No walk in the park to Senate for Koko Pimentel
GREAT EXPECTATIONS. Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III lauds Zubiri for his “unprecedented” move even as the Senate Electoral Tribunal still has to decide on his electoral protest.
Not so fast.
The resignation of Sen. Juan Miguel Zubiri will not automatically translate to a victory for his chief rival Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III, according to legal eagles.
Pimentel himself admitted to the Inquirer that the Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET) would first have to resolve his election protest against Zubiri and proclaim him the official winner of the 12th and final slot in the 2007 senatorial race.
Justice Secretary Leila de Lima, who stood as Pimentel’s lawyer in his electoral protest, also said as much.
“The SET has yet to annul Zubiri’s proclamation by declaring Pimentel the rightful winner,” De Lima said in a text message.
“I wish to add that Zubiri’s resignation, instead of foreclosing issues of electoral fraud in the 2007 elections, further throws them wide open for deeper investigation by the soon-to-be constituted joint committee [of the Department of Justice and the Commission on Elections].”
Election Chair Sixto Brillantes Jr., who served as lead counsel of the Genuine Opposition senatorial slate that included Pimentel, likewise said the latter would have to wait for a favorable ruling from the SET before he could assume his seat in the chamber.
“It’s OK to me that [Zubiri] resigned,” Brillantes told reporters. “Maybe he was having a difficult time accepting the statements [from various sectors questioning the legitimacy of his election]. I think that’s what forced him to resign, but this will also help Pimentel’s protest.”
Brillantes said Zubiri’s resignation was “the more statesmanly move.”
Vacancy
He said that if he were Zubiri’s election lawyer, he would probably have advised the senator to hold on to his seat as long as possible.
Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III said Zubiri’s resignation would merely lead to a vacancy in the 24-member chamber. He said the chamber would issue a resolution relaying the resignation to the SET.
Election lawyer Romulo Macalintal said the Senate could hold Zubiri’s resignation “in abeyance” until the SET had decided on Pimentel’s election protest and Zubiri’s counterprotest.
“If the SET says that Pimentel is the winner, then he takes over,” Macalintal told the Inquirer.
“If the SET finds Zubiri the real winner, the question is, can he come back? If the resignation is already accepted, he cannot come back. But if the resignation is only held in abeyance, he can.”
Brillantes also said that should the SET rule against Pimentel, “Zubiri may no longer take back his resignation, and his seat would be declared vacant, which may be filled by a special election.”
If Pimentel gets proclaimed, it is he who will be considered to have served one term as senator, and not Zubiri, Brillantes said.
Zubiri, however, said that against his lawyers’ wishes, he had decided to withdraw his counterprotest against Pimentel at the SET.
State of denial
In an interview with the Inquirer, Pimentel said he was hoping that the SET would expedite the resolution of the election protest in his favor.
Pimentel commended Zubiri for his “unprecedented” move, but was not happy that the latter had insisted that there was no cheating in the 2007 elections.
“I noticed that he’s still in a state of denial, but that’s immaterial now. What’s important is he has resigned already. It’s an unprecedented thing for which he would be remembered,” Pimentel said.
As yet unaware of Zubiri’s decision to withdraw his counterprotest, Pimentel said the resignation would also render the counterprotest “moot and academic.”
“As a lawyer, that’s my off-the-cuff answer because when you resign, that means you’re no longer interested in an election protest,” he said.
Pimentel was represented by Brillantes and De Lima at the Comelec and the Supreme Court. Both of them have said they would not take part in any final decision that the joint inquiry might reach against those found to have committed fraud in the 2004 and 2007 elections.
Brillantes reiterated that the joint inquiry would focus “not on who won, but if cheating took place.”
Asked if the election body and the justice department would summon Zubiri to testify at its joint inquiry, Brillantes said: “Anything is possible. But I think he was not involved in cheating directly. It’s impossible that he was the one who switched the election returns or doctored them. But he can be invited if he knows something. We will not waste time inviting him. We would rather go to the people who were directly involved in the commission of electoral fraud.” With a report from Marlon Ramos
